According to Denis Dyack, the games industry—specifically, the AAA domain—is in the same position film studios were in the 1920s, the game designer told GameSpot.

“AAA is not fine,” Dyack told GameSpot. “I think our industry now is in a position exactly where Hollywood was in the early ’20s–the golden era of films. Making movies like Cleopatra or Ben-Hur where everyone was employed and they had thousands of staff. And they made fantastic movies; those were great movies; I still watch them today; they’re amazing. But studios looked at it and said, ‘We’re not making money. This is not working.'”

What Dyack is referring to is the idea that a new game doesn’t prove immediately profitable, and as such is unceremoniously dropped from realizing its potential through sequels and spinoffs. This is something Ubisoft has pretty much admitted to, stating that they won’t start up a new IP unless they are certain of its franchise potential.

“And then those [film] studios didn’t disappear; and it’s not to say that it’s going to be over for EA or any of the studios. They’re still going to be around,” Dyack added. “I don’t think anyone should kid themselves about that.

“But what did happen is they changed the way they worked and it went more towards the model that we have. Which I would call…a micro-studio or a very focused studio that grows and expands but are not employees of this one group, where it’s basically not internal development. It’s much more efficient that way. I think that’s where AAA may go, or at least game development can go.”

About

By | 07/30/2013 01:57 PM PT

News

According to Denis Dyack, the games industry—specifically, the AAA domain—is in the same position film studios were in the 1920s, the game designer told GameSpot.

“AAA is not fine,” Dyack told GameSpot. “I think our industry now is in a position exactly where Hollywood was in the early ’20s–the golden era of films. Making movies like Cleopatra or Ben-Hur where everyone was employed and they had thousands of staff. And they made fantastic movies; those were great movies; I still watch them today; they’re amazing. But studios looked at it and said, ‘We’re not making money. This is not working.'”

What Dyack is referring to is the idea that a new game doesn’t prove immediately profitable, and as such is unceremoniously dropped from realizing its potential through sequels and spinoffs. This is something Ubisoft has pretty much admitted to, stating that they won’t start up a new IP unless they are certain of its franchise potential.

“And then those [film] studios didn’t disappear; and it’s not to say that it’s going to be over for EA or any of the studios. They’re still going to be around,” Dyack added. “I don’t think anyone should kid themselves about that.

“But what did happen is they changed the way they worked and it went more towards the model that we have. Which I would call…a micro-studio or a very focused studio that grows and expands but are not employees of this one group, where it’s basically not internal development. It’s much more efficient that way. I think that’s where AAA may go, or at least game development can go.”